This is an EFA for the ratings of the self on all items. Only 70 of the 77 have totally complete data, and to be conservative, I’m just looking at those 70. We don’t lose too much without those 7 and it’s easier to satisfy assumptions of EFA without missing data. Haven’t looked closely at what they’re missing yet though.
These histograms by themselves tell a really interesting story – you can see that there is a some overlap between Acc and Cont ratings, but some items distinguish between them. These line up with a lot of our a priori ideas – see anger and jealousy. Pretty cool.
Aside from the status items, you also can see the scores on depression and substance use, among other things. Keep in mind the middle 2 CES_D items are reverse coded. SES ladder is mostly between 3-7 on a 9 point scale.
## Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max.
## 18.00 20.00 21.00 21.56 23.00 25.00
## [1] 1.976222
| desc | skew | pval | mean | sd |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| insecure_Self | -0.0283501 | 0.9019713 | 3.490000 | 1.7551943 |
| daring_Self | -0.0369397 | 0.8725091 | 3.250000 | 1.4728177 |
| stubborn_Self | -0.0579809 | 0.8012135 | 3.490000 | 1.5858911 |
| leader_Self | 0.1027514 | 0.6559274 | 3.310000 | 1.5419717 |
| outgoing_Self | -0.1224289 | 0.5958376 | 3.550000 | 1.7602514 |
| popular_Self | 0.1436750 | 0.5359458 | 3.292929 | 1.5859879 |
| trendy_Self | -0.1445669 | 0.5334386 | 3.454546 | 1.5536181 |
| athletic_Self | -0.1573981 | 0.4961474 | 3.540000 | 1.6231905 |
| plain_Self | 0.1663235 | 0.4742817 | 3.232323 | 1.5896880 |
| pushover_Self | 0.1733206 | 0.4561013 | 3.010101 | 1.6567423 |
| confident_Self | -0.1805505 | 0.4377608 | 3.686869 | 1.5626147 |
| flirty_Self | 0.1910091 | 0.4120430 | 3.121212 | 1.6242595 |
| lonely_Self | 0.2134421 | 0.3580291 | 3.170000 | 1.6517820 |
| jealous_Self | 0.2166837 | 0.3509063 | 2.900000 | 1.4389952 |
| admired_Self | -0.2248039 | 0.3334858 | 3.610000 | 1.4832056 |
| loner_Self | 0.2408992 | 0.3007352 | 3.120000 | 1.7249213 |
| awkward_Self | -0.2509980 | 0.2813861 | 3.600000 | 1.6817499 |
| poor_Self | 0.2688930 | 0.2493376 | 2.840000 | 1.5486716 |
| dependent_Self | -0.3042124 | 0.1941856 | 3.650000 | 1.4310764 |
| risky_Self | 0.3162972 | 0.1776644 | 2.900000 | 1.4459976 |
| shy_Self | -0.3172830 | 0.1763672 | 3.850000 | 1.7196135 |
| cool_Self | -0.3321158 | 0.1595970 | 3.767677 | 1.4971284 |
| depressed_Self | 0.3563828 | 0.1324318 | 2.989899 | 1.6751177 |
| social_Self | -0.3708593 | 0.1164910 | 3.910000 | 1.6023657 |
| selfish_Self | 0.4277253 | 0.0737972 | 2.646465 | 1.4308063 |
| boring _Self | 0.4287829 | 0.0718664 | 2.770000 | 1.5166084 |
| patient_Self | -0.4599712 | 0.0557251 | 4.141414 | 1.3477881 |
| studious_Self | -0.4838010 | 0.0440607 | 4.370000 | 1.2764772 |
| adventurous_Self | -0.4871470 | 0.0427308 | 3.960000 | 1.4696938 |
| genuine_Self | -0.5502226 | 0.0235596 | 4.730000 | 1.0996326 |
| considerate_Self | -0.5567995 | 0.0221008 | 4.810000 | 1.0317681 |
| bossy_Self | 0.5578755 | 0.0218702 | 2.610000 | 1.5034976 |
| lazy_Self | 0.5746806 | 0.0190660 | 2.636364 | 1.5349968 |
| grumpy_Self | 0.5781332 | 0.0184309 | 2.646465 | 1.5139699 |
| caring_Self | -0.6049512 | 0.0137084 | 4.740000 | 1.0882290 |
| attractive_Self | -0.6192752 | 0.0118559 | 4.090000 | 1.3640033 |
| comforting_Self | -0.6278347 | 0.0108637 | 4.160000 | 1.3905889 |
| funny_Self | -0.6287765 | 0.0107594 | 4.210000 | 1.2815316 |
| rule-follower_Self | -0.6307734 | 0.0105414 | 4.300000 | 1.3521401 |
| controlling_Self | 0.6337901 | 0.0102200 | 2.600000 | 1.4839206 |
| calm_Self | -0.6507185 | 0.0088741 | 4.444444 | 1.1712737 |
| humble_Self | -0.6776478 | 0.0064745 | 4.360000 | 1.2351747 |
| helpful_Self | -0.6789290 | 0.0063877 | 4.780000 | 1.0596359 |
| agressive_Self | 0.7324172 | 0.0037556 | 2.333333 | 1.4356965 |
| giving_Self | -0.7483863 | 0.0030331 | 4.560000 | 1.2578642 |
| snobby_Self | 0.7502175 | 0.0031001 | 2.323232 | 1.4765395 |
| angry_Self | 0.7731570 | 0.0023127 | 2.480000 | 1.4666667 |
| honest_Self | -0.7748193 | 0.0023727 | 4.595960 | 1.2030505 |
| motivated_Self | -0.7847003 | 0.0021295 | 4.444444 | 1.2874767 |
| rude_Self | 0.8024367 | 0.0016730 | 2.170000 | 1.2953296 |
| mean_Self | 0.8178574 | 0.0014088 | 2.230000 | 1.4131775 |
| nice_Self | -0.8676875 | 0.0008039 | 4.880000 | 0.9773185 |
| welcoming_Self | -0.8746451 | 0.0007429 | 4.550000 | 1.2007994 |
| friendly_Self | -0.8770667 | 0.0007227 | 4.650000 | 1.2583057 |
| ugly_Self | 0.9027683 | 0.0005391 | 2.390000 | 1.4347421 |
| sympathetic_Self | -0.9293323 | 0.0004210 | 4.525252 | 1.3041804 |
| trustworthy_Self | -1.0070150 | 0.0001616 | 4.830000 | 1.0546195 |
| smart_Self | -1.0217586 | 0.0001552 | 4.918367 | 0.9809891 |
| fair_Self | -1.0710441 | 0.0000764 | 4.630000 | 1.2605514 |
| fake_Self | 1.0872091 | 0.0000632 | 1.930000 | 1.1997895 |
| loyal_Self | -1.1144612 | 0.0000458 | 4.770000 | 1.1964172 |
| respectful_Self | -1.2988493 | 0.0000052 | 4.870000 | 1.0885539 |
The plot below seems to indicate that a good number of people consider themselves high status in both ways (all responses in the top right quadrant). There doesn’t seem to be perfect separation between the two. However, note that the bottom left quadrant reflects responses from people that think neither type of status describes them well (31 people). Also note that the overlap group is only comprises 13 people. Number of primarily accepted status = 39, and primarily controversial status participants = 15.
| Cont_v_Acc | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6 |
| 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 3 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 0 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 0 |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| 6 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
The more traditional approach would be to use EFA. What we hope to get is 2 factors the correspond to Accepted High Status and Controversial High Status.
However, the scree plot shows very clearly a 3 factor solution will account for most of the variance, with no real gain if we increase beyond 4.
Here’s the raw output, if you like, but see below for a prettier table. Notice the factors are allowed to correlate.
## Factor Analysis using method = pa
## Call: fa(r = select(selfRateDat, -matches("SelfPop")), nfactors = 3,
## rotate = "oblimin", scores = "tenBerge", fm = "pa", use = "pairwise.complete.obs")
## Standardized loadings (pattern matrix) based upon correlation matrix
## item PA3 PA1 PA2 h2 u2 com
## insecure_Self 31 -0.86 0.72 0.28 1.1
## lonely_Self 35 -0.84 0.69 0.31 1.3
## depressed_Self 19 -0.82 0.29 0.69 0.31 1.3
## loner_Self 36 -0.79 0.64 0.36 1.0
## awkward_Self 7 -0.78 0.59 0.41 1.3
## confident_Self 13 0.77 0.74 0.26 1.2
## trendy_Self 59 0.76 0.67 0.33 1.2
## shy_Self 52 -0.73 0.49 0.51 1.2
## popular_Self 45 0.72 0.73 0.27 1.5
## social_Self 55 0.71 0.71 0.29 1.5
## plain_Self 43 -0.67 0.42 0.58 1.1
## flirty_Self 22 0.64 0.51 0.49 1.4
## boring _Self 8 -0.64 0.46 0.54 1.3
## admired_Self 1 0.62 0.36 0.65 0.35 2.0
## outgoing_Self 41 0.62 0.52 0.48 1.4
## attractive_Self 6 0.61 0.33 0.63 0.37 1.8
## cool_Self 16 0.60 0.41 0.68 0.32 2.2
## ugly_Self 61 -0.59 0.47 0.53 1.4
## leader_Self 34 0.57 0.32 0.49 0.51 1.7
## pushover_Self 46 -0.57 0.35 0.65 1.3
## adventurous_Self 2 0.50 0.29 0.33 0.51 0.49 2.4
## funny_Self 24 0.49 0.30 0.43 0.57 1.9
## poor_Self 44 -0.46 0.33 0.45 0.55 2.3
## daring_Self 17 0.43 0.38 0.36 0.64 2.0
## athletic_Self 5 0.31 0.17 0.83 1.9
## nice_Self 40 0.84 0.73 0.27 1.0
## considerate_Self 14 0.83 0.69 0.31 1.1
## helpful_Self 28 0.79 0.66 0.34 1.0
## genuine_Self 25 0.77 0.58 0.42 1.0
## caring_Self 11 0.76 0.59 0.41 1.0
## loyal_Self 37 0.74 0.51 0.49 1.1
## friendly_Self 23 0.72 0.59 0.41 1.1
## trustworthy_Self 60 0.72 0.58 0.42 1.0
## giving_Self 26 0.71 0.52 0.48 1.0
## sympathetic_Self 58 0.71 0.52 0.48 1.0
## welcoming_Self 62 0.68 0.58 0.42 1.2
## fair_Self 20 0.59 0.46 0.54 1.2
## respectful_Self 47 0.57 0.35 0.65 1.0
## humble_Self 30 0.56 0.38 0.62 1.7
## calm_Self 10 0.55 0.44 0.56 1.3
## honest_Self 29 0.50 0.40 0.60 1.5
## rule-follower_Self 50 0.47 0.22 0.78 1.4
## studious_Self 57 0.47 0.22 0.78 1.1
## motivated_Self 39 0.46 0.29 0.71 1.2
## smart_Self 53 0.45 0.23 0.77 1.1
## comforting_Self 12 0.34 0.44 0.40 0.60 1.9
## patient_Self 42 0.43 0.36 0.64 1.9
## controlling_Self 15 0.74 0.61 0.39 1.2
## snobby_Self 54 -0.29 0.72 0.68 0.32 1.3
## bossy_Self 9 0.72 0.62 0.38 1.3
## angry_Self 4 -0.32 0.71 0.64 0.36 1.4
## rude_Self 49 0.70 0.62 0.38 1.3
## mean_Self 38 -0.32 0.70 0.67 0.33 1.4
## grumpy_Self 27 -0.42 0.66 0.62 0.38 1.7
## agressive_Self 3 0.66 0.55 0.45 1.4
## selfish_Self 51 0.60 0.52 0.48 1.5
## jealous_Self 32 -0.39 0.56 0.44 0.56 1.8
## lazy_Self 33 0.49 0.33 0.67 1.4
## fake_Self 21 -0.40 0.48 0.51 0.49 2.1
## stubborn_Self 56 0.47 0.21 0.79 1.2
## risky_Self 48 0.46 0.27 0.73 1.4
## dependent_Self 18 0.39 0.19 0.81 2.3
##
## PA3 PA1 PA2
## SS loadings 12.44 11.27 7.84
## Proportion Var 0.20 0.18 0.13
## Cumulative Var 0.20 0.38 0.51
## Proportion Explained 0.39 0.36 0.25
## Cumulative Proportion 0.39 0.75 1.00
##
## With factor correlations of
## PA3 PA1 PA2
## PA3 1.00 0.31 0.04
## PA1 0.31 1.00 -0.19
## PA2 0.04 -0.19 1.00
##
## Mean item complexity = 1.4
## Test of the hypothesis that 3 factors are sufficient.
##
## The degrees of freedom for the null model are 1891 and the objective function was 72.05 with Chi Square of 5583.84
## The degrees of freedom for the model are 1708 and the objective function was 34.22
##
## The root mean square of the residuals (RMSR) is 0.06
## The df corrected root mean square of the residuals is 0.06
##
## The harmonic number of observations is 99 with the empirical chi square 1373.9 with prob < 1
## The total number of observations was 100 with Likelihood Chi Square = 2583.27 with prob < 6.4e-39
##
## Tucker Lewis Index of factoring reliability = 0.727
## RMSEA index = 0.1 and the 90 % confidence intervals are 0.066 NA
## BIC = -5282.36
## Fit based upon off diagonal values = 0.97
## Measures of factor score adequacy
## PA3 PA1 PA2
## Correlation of (regression) scores with factors 0.99 0.98 0.98
## Multiple R square of scores with factors 0.97 0.96 0.96
## Minimum correlation of possible factor scores 0.95 0.93 0.91
There are no items with really poor loadings on all three factors, but there are a lot with high cross loadings. Anything > .3 is potentially suspect (even that is a little liberal). I’ve pulled out 13 such items:
admired_Self 1 0.62 0.25 0.36 0.65 0.35 2.0
cool_Self 16 0.60 0.27 0.41 0.68 0.32 2.2
leader_Self 34 0.57 0.12 0.32 0.49 0.51 1.7
adventurous_Self 2 0.50 0.29 0.33 0.51 0.49 2.4
poor_Self 44 -0.46 -0.22 0.33 0.45 0.55 2.3
daring_Self 17 0.43 0.08 0.38 0.36 0.64 2.0
comforting_Self 12 0.34 0.44 0.00 0.40 0.60 1.9
angry_Self 4 -0.32 -0.09 0.71 0.64 0.36 1.4
grumpy_Self 27 -0.42 -0.05 0.66 0.62 0.38 1.7
jealous_Self 32 -0.39 0.02 0.56 0.44 0.56 1.8
patient_Self 42 0.13 0.43 -0.27 0.36 0.64 1.9
mean_Self 38 0.01 -0.32 0.70 0.67 0.33 1.4
fake_Self 21 -0.14 -0.40 0.48 0.51 0.49 2.1
We can try again after dropping items with too much noise/cross loading
## Factor Analysis using method = pa
## Call: fa(r = select(selfRateDat_lim, -matches("SelfPop")), nfactors = 3,
## rotate = "oblimin", scores = "tenBerge", fm = "pa", use = "pairwise.complete.obs")
## Standardized loadings (pattern matrix) based upon correlation matrix
## item PA1 PA3 PA2 h2 u2 com
## considerate_Self 10 0.84 0.68 0.32 1.1
## nice_Self 29 0.84 0.71 0.29 1.0
## helpful_Self 20 0.80 0.64 0.36 1.0
## caring_Self 8 0.77 0.60 0.40 1.0
## genuine_Self 18 0.77 0.58 0.42 1.0
## friendly_Self 16 0.74 0.58 0.42 1.0
## loyal_Self 27 0.74 0.50 0.50 1.1
## trustworthy_Self 47 0.73 0.59 0.41 1.0
## giving_Self 19 0.72 0.52 0.48 1.0
## sympathetic_Self 45 0.72 0.54 0.46 1.0
## welcoming_Self 49 0.68 0.58 0.42 1.2
## fair_Self 14 0.60 0.49 0.51 1.3
## respectful_Self 34 0.59 0.36 0.64 1.0
## calm_Self 7 0.57 0.42 0.58 1.2
## humble_Self 22 0.55 0.38 0.62 1.7
## honest_Self 21 0.52 0.40 0.60 1.4
## motivated_Self 28 0.49 0.30 0.70 1.2
## studious_Self 44 0.48 0.22 0.78 1.1
## rule-follower_Self 37 0.48 0.22 0.78 1.4
## smart_Self 40 0.46 0.24 0.76 1.1
## insecure_Self 23 0.88 0.72 0.28 1.0
## lonely_Self 25 0.87 0.69 0.31 1.1
## depressed_Self 13 0.85 0.68 0.32 1.1
## awkward_Self 4 0.82 0.61 0.39 1.2
## loner_Self 26 0.79 0.66 0.34 1.0
## shy_Self 39 0.70 0.47 0.53 1.2
## plain_Self 31 0.70 0.45 0.55 1.0
## confident_Self 9 -0.69 0.72 0.28 1.5
## boring _Self 5 0.68 0.49 0.51 1.1
## trendy_Self 46 -0.67 0.36 0.69 0.31 1.6
## social_Self 42 -0.63 0.37 0.73 0.27 2.0
## popular_Self 32 -0.62 0.36 0.73 0.27 2.0
## pushover_Self 33 0.60 0.35 0.65 1.2
## ugly_Self 48 0.59 0.46 0.54 1.3
## flirty_Self 15 -0.55 0.39 0.53 0.47 1.9
## outgoing_Self 30 -0.54 0.33 0.52 0.48 1.9
## attractive_Self 3 0.36 -0.52 0.31 0.62 0.38 2.5
## funny_Self 17 0.32 -0.44 0.43 0.57 2.3
## athletic_Self 2 0.15 0.85 2.6
## controlling_Self 11 0.79 0.65 0.35 1.0
## bossy_Self 6 0.79 0.68 0.32 1.0
## snobby_Self 41 -0.30 0.70 0.66 0.34 1.4
## rude_Self 36 0.67 0.58 0.42 1.3
## agressive_Self 1 0.66 0.54 0.46 1.3
## selfish_Self 38 0.60 0.52 0.48 1.6
## risky_Self 35 0.47 0.25 0.75 1.1
## stubborn_Self 43 0.47 0.21 0.79 1.4
## lazy_Self 24 0.47 0.33 0.67 1.8
## dependent_Self 12 0.35 0.37 0.20 0.80 2.4
##
## PA1 PA3 PA2
## SS loadings 10.28 9.38 5.19
## Proportion Var 0.21 0.19 0.11
## Cumulative Var 0.21 0.40 0.51
## Proportion Explained 0.41 0.38 0.21
## Cumulative Proportion 0.41 0.79 1.00
##
## With factor correlations of
## PA1 PA3 PA2
## PA1 1.00 -0.32 -0.16
## PA3 -0.32 1.00 -0.14
## PA2 -0.16 -0.14 1.00
##
## Mean item complexity = 1.4
## Test of the hypothesis that 3 factors are sufficient.
##
## The degrees of freedom for the null model are 1176 and the objective function was 48.06 with Chi Square of 3933.13
## The degrees of freedom for the model are 1032 and the objective function was 19.43
##
## The root mean square of the residuals (RMSR) is 0.06
## The df corrected root mean square of the residuals is 0.06
##
## The harmonic number of observations is 99 with the empirical chi square 822.03 with prob < 1
## The total number of observations was 100 with Likelihood Chi Square = 1551.46 with prob < 1.3e-23
##
## Tucker Lewis Index of factoring reliability = 0.778
## RMSEA index = 0.093 and the 90 % confidence intervals are 0.064 NA
## BIC = -3201.08
## Fit based upon off diagonal values = 0.97
## Measures of factor score adequacy
## PA1 PA3 PA2
## Correlation of (regression) scores with factors 0.98 0.98 0.97
## Multiple R square of scores with factors 0.96 0.97 0.94
## Minimum correlation of possible factor scores 0.92 0.93 0.88
There are still some bad items:
athletic_Self 2 0.20 -0.24 0.14 0.15 0.85 2.6
funny_Self 17 0.32 -0.44 0.20 0.43 0.57 2.3
attractive_Self 3 0.36 -0.52 0.31 0.62 0.38 2.5
dependent_Self 12 0.17 0.35 0.37 0.20 0.80 2.4
## Factor Analysis using method = pa
## Call: fa(r = select(selfRateDat_lim2, -matches("SelfPop")), nfactors = 3,
## rotate = "oblimin", scores = "tenBerge", fm = "pa", use = "pairwise.complete.obs")
## Standardized loadings (pattern matrix) based upon correlation matrix
## item PA1 PA2 PA3 h2 u2 com
## nice_Self 25 0.84 0.71 0.29 1.0
## considerate_Self 8 0.84 0.68 0.32 1.1
## helpful_Self 16 0.79 0.63 0.37 1.0
## caring_Self 6 0.78 0.60 0.40 1.0
## genuine_Self 14 0.77 0.58 0.42 1.0
## friendly_Self 13 0.75 0.59 0.41 1.0
## loyal_Self 23 0.74 0.50 0.50 1.1
## trustworthy_Self 43 0.73 0.57 0.43 1.0
## sympathetic_Self 41 0.72 0.54 0.46 1.0
## giving_Self 15 0.72 0.52 0.48 1.0
## welcoming_Self 45 0.68 0.59 0.41 1.2
## fair_Self 11 0.62 0.49 0.51 1.2
## respectful_Self 30 0.58 0.36 0.64 1.0
## calm_Self 5 0.57 0.41 0.59 1.2
## humble_Self 18 0.55 0.38 0.62 1.7
## honest_Self 17 0.53 0.40 0.60 1.4
## motivated_Self 24 0.50 0.30 0.70 1.1
## rule-follower_Self 33 0.48 0.22 0.78 1.3
## studious_Self 40 0.47 0.22 0.78 1.1
## smart_Self 36 0.45 0.23 0.77 1.1
## insecure_Self 19 0.89 0.74 0.26 1.0
## lonely_Self 21 0.87 0.70 0.30 1.1
## depressed_Self 10 0.84 0.68 0.32 1.1
## awkward_Self 2 0.83 0.63 0.37 1.2
## loner_Self 22 0.79 0.67 0.33 1.0
## plain_Self 27 0.70 0.45 0.55 1.0
## shy_Self 35 0.67 0.46 0.54 1.2
## confident_Self 7 -0.67 0.73 0.27 1.6
## boring _Self 3 0.67 0.48 0.52 1.1
## trendy_Self 42 -0.66 0.38 0.69 0.31 1.7
## social_Self 38 -0.61 0.38 0.72 0.28 2.1
## popular_Self 28 -0.60 0.39 0.73 0.27 2.2
## pushover_Self 29 0.59 0.34 0.66 1.2
## ugly_Self 44 0.57 0.45 0.55 1.3
## flirty_Self 12 -0.54 0.40 0.54 0.46 1.9
## outgoing_Self 26 -0.53 0.34 0.52 0.48 2.0
## bossy_Self 4 0.80 0.68 0.32 1.0
## controlling_Self 9 0.80 0.65 0.35 1.0
## snobby_Self 37 -0.30 0.68 0.65 0.35 1.5
## agressive_Self 1 0.66 0.54 0.46 1.3
## rude_Self 32 0.65 0.56 0.44 1.3
## selfish_Self 34 0.58 0.51 0.49 1.7
## stubborn_Self 39 0.50 0.24 0.76 1.5
## risky_Self 31 0.49 0.26 0.74 1.0
## lazy_Self 20 0.46 0.32 0.68 1.8
##
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## SS loadings 9.99 8.55 4.95
## Proportion Var 0.22 0.19 0.11
## Cumulative Var 0.22 0.41 0.52
## Proportion Explained 0.43 0.36 0.21
## Cumulative Proportion 0.43 0.79 1.00
##
## With factor correlations of
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## PA1 1.00 -0.31 -0.18
## PA2 -0.31 1.00 -0.14
## PA3 -0.18 -0.14 1.00
##
## Mean item complexity = 1.3
## Test of the hypothesis that 3 factors are sufficient.
##
## The degrees of freedom for the null model are 990 and the objective function was 42.78 with Chi Square of 3557.57
## The degrees of freedom for the model are 858 and the objective function was 15.85
##
## The root mean square of the residuals (RMSR) is 0.06
## The df corrected root mean square of the residuals is 0.06
##
## The harmonic number of observations is 99 with the empirical chi square 658.67 with prob < 1
## The total number of observations was 100 with Likelihood Chi Square = 1286.33 with prob < 1e-19
##
## Tucker Lewis Index of factoring reliability = 0.801
## RMSEA index = 0.091 and the 90 % confidence intervals are 0.063 NA
## BIC = -2664.91
## Fit based upon off diagonal values = 0.97
## Measures of factor score adequacy
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## Correlation of (regression) scores with factors 0.98 0.98 0.97
## Multiple R square of scores with factors 0.96 0.97 0.93
## Minimum correlation of possible factor scores 0.92 0.93 0.86
This should finish off our cleaning:
trendy_Self 42 0.11 -0.66 0.38 0.69 0.31 1.7
social_Self 38 0.27 -0.61 0.38 0.72 0.28 2.1
popular_Self 28 0.29 -0.60 0.39 0.73 0.27 2.2
flirty_Self 12 0.10 -0.54 0.40 0.54 0.46 1.9
outgoing_Self 26 0.19 -0.53 0.34 0.52 0.48 2.0
## Factor Analysis using method = pa
## Call: fa(r = select(selfRateDat_lim3, -matches("SelfPop")), nfactors = 3,
## rotate = "oblimin", scores = "tenBerge", fm = "pa", use = "pairwise.complete.obs")
## Standardized loadings (pattern matrix) based upon correlation matrix
## item PA1 PA2 PA3 h2 u2 com
## considerate_Self 8 0.82 0.68 0.32 1.1
## nice_Self 24 0.82 0.71 0.29 1.0
## helpful_Self 15 0.80 0.63 0.37 1.0
## genuine_Self 13 0.78 0.59 0.41 1.0
## caring_Self 6 0.78 0.60 0.40 1.0
## friendly_Self 12 0.76 0.59 0.41 1.0
## trustworthy_Self 38 0.75 0.59 0.41 1.0
## loyal_Self 22 0.74 0.50 0.50 1.1
## giving_Self 14 0.72 0.51 0.49 1.0
## sympathetic_Self 37 0.71 0.54 0.46 1.0
## welcoming_Self 40 0.68 0.59 0.41 1.1
## fair_Self 11 0.60 0.49 0.51 1.2
## respectful_Self 27 0.58 0.36 0.64 1.0
## calm_Self 5 0.57 0.41 0.59 1.1
## honest_Self 16 0.53 0.40 0.60 1.3
## humble_Self 17 0.51 0.38 0.62 1.8
## motivated_Self 23 0.51 0.30 0.70 1.1
## studious_Self 36 0.47 0.22 0.78 1.1
## rule-follower_Self 30 0.46 0.22 0.78 1.4
## smart_Self 33 0.46 0.23 0.77 1.0
## insecure_Self 18 0.87 0.74 0.26 1.0
## lonely_Self 20 0.86 0.71 0.29 1.0
## depressed_Self 10 0.82 0.68 0.32 1.0
## awkward_Self 2 0.81 0.62 0.38 1.1
## loner_Self 21 0.78 0.68 0.32 1.1
## plain_Self 25 0.70 0.47 0.53 1.0
## shy_Self 32 0.66 0.46 0.54 1.2
## boring _Self 3 0.66 0.48 0.52 1.1
## confident_Self 7 0.31 -0.66 0.31 0.68 0.32 1.9
## pushover_Self 26 0.60 0.36 0.64 1.1
## ugly_Self 39 0.59 0.48 0.52 1.3
## controlling_Self 9 0.84 0.66 0.34 1.1
## bossy_Self 4 0.83 0.68 0.32 1.0
## agressive_Self 1 0.68 0.56 0.44 1.1
## snobby_Self 34 0.67 0.63 0.37 1.3
## rude_Self 29 0.66 0.56 0.44 1.2
## selfish_Self 31 0.61 0.54 0.46 1.4
## stubborn_Self 35 0.53 0.26 0.74 1.5
## risky_Self 28 0.48 0.23 0.77 1.1
## lazy_Self 19 0.45 0.32 0.68 1.6
##
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## SS loadings 9.57 6.41 4.37
## Proportion Var 0.24 0.16 0.11
## Cumulative Var 0.24 0.40 0.51
## Proportion Explained 0.47 0.32 0.21
## Cumulative Proportion 0.47 0.79 1.00
##
## With factor correlations of
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## PA1 1.00 -0.28 -0.31
## PA2 -0.28 1.00 0.00
## PA3 -0.31 0.00 1.00
##
## Mean item complexity = 1.2
## Test of the hypothesis that 3 factors are sufficient.
##
## The degrees of freedom for the null model are 780 and the objective function was 34.46 with Chi Square of 2923.31
## The degrees of freedom for the model are 663 and the objective function was 12.24
##
## The root mean square of the residuals (RMSR) is 0.06
## The df corrected root mean square of the residuals is 0.06
##
## The harmonic number of observations is 99 with the empirical chi square 553.1 with prob < 1
## The total number of observations was 100 with Likelihood Chi Square = 1013.97 with prob < 3.7e-17
##
## Tucker Lewis Index of factoring reliability = 0.801
## RMSEA index = 0.091 and the 90 % confidence intervals are 0.064 NA
## BIC = -2039.26
## Fit based upon off diagonal values = 0.97
## Measures of factor score adequacy
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## Correlation of (regression) scores with factors 0.98 0.97 0.96
## Multiple R square of scores with factors 0.96 0.95 0.92
## Minimum correlation of possible factor scores 0.91 0.90 0.83
After three rounds of item exclusion, we come up with a pretty clear factor structure.
The factors are a bit skewed. This may be due to highly skewed items. What’s the effect of removing them?
They include:
## Factor Analysis using method = pa
## Call: fa(r = select(selfRateDat_lim, -matches("SelfPop")), nfactors = 3,
## rotate = "oblimin", scores = "tenBerge", fm = "pa", use = "pairwise.complete.obs")
## Standardized loadings (pattern matrix) based upon correlation matrix
## item PA1 PA2 PA3 h2 u2 com
## insecure_Self 28 -0.86 0.73 0.27 1.1
## lonely_Self 32 -0.83 0.69 0.31 1.3
## depressed_Self 19 -0.81 0.30 0.69 0.31 1.3
## loner_Self 33 -0.79 0.64 0.36 1.0
## confident_Self 13 0.77 0.74 0.26 1.2
## awkward_Self 7 -0.77 0.59 0.41 1.3
## trendy_Self 51 0.77 0.68 0.32 1.2
## shy_Self 46 -0.74 0.50 0.50 1.2
## social_Self 48 0.73 0.71 0.29 1.4
## popular_Self 40 0.73 0.73 0.27 1.4
## plain_Self 38 -0.68 0.44 0.56 1.1
## flirty_Self 20 0.65 0.51 0.49 1.3
## boring _Self 8 -0.64 0.45 0.55 1.3
## outgoing_Self 36 0.63 0.52 0.48 1.3
## admired_Self 1 0.62 0.33 0.66 0.34 2.0
## attractive_Self 6 0.61 0.32 0.62 0.38 1.7
## cool_Self 16 0.60 0.37 0.32 0.69 0.31 2.2
## leader_Self 31 0.57 0.30 0.49 0.51 1.7
## pushover_Self 41 -0.56 0.33 0.67 1.3
## adventurous_Self 2 0.52 0.50 0.50 2.2
## funny_Self 21 0.51 0.42 0.58 1.6
## poor_Self 39 -0.46 0.36 0.45 0.55 2.3
## daring_Self 17 0.44 0.36 0.36 0.64 2.0
## athletic_Self 5 0.30 0.19 0.81 2.0
## snobby_Self 47 0.76 0.66 0.34 1.2
## controlling_Self 15 0.74 0.62 0.38 1.2
## bossy_Self 9 0.74 0.62 0.38 1.2
## angry_Self 4 -0.31 0.74 0.65 0.35 1.4
## rude_Self 43 0.73 0.64 0.36 1.2
## mean_Self 34 0.73 -0.29 0.68 0.32 1.3
## agressive_Self 3 0.69 0.56 0.44 1.2
## grumpy_Self 24 -0.41 0.69 0.63 0.37 1.6
## selfish_Self 45 0.64 0.53 0.47 1.3
## jealous_Self 29 -0.37 0.56 0.43 0.57 1.7
## lazy_Self 30 0.52 0.33 0.67 1.3
## risky_Self 42 0.47 0.27 0.73 1.4
## stubborn_Self 49 0.46 0.21 0.79 1.2
## dependent_Self 18 0.37 0.19 0.81 2.3
## helpful_Self 25 0.80 0.71 0.29 1.0
## considerate_Self 14 0.80 0.69 0.31 1.2
## genuine_Self 22 0.73 0.57 0.43 1.0
## caring_Self 11 0.71 0.57 0.43 1.1
## giving_Self 23 0.67 0.49 0.51 1.0
## humble_Self 27 0.57 0.43 0.57 1.8
## calm_Self 10 0.56 0.46 0.54 1.5
## honest_Self 26 0.45 0.38 0.62 2.0
## rule-follower_Self 44 0.45 0.21 0.79 1.4
## studious_Self 50 0.44 0.21 0.79 1.2
## comforting_Self 12 0.35 0.43 0.41 0.59 2.0
## patient_Self 37 -0.33 0.43 0.38 0.62 2.1
## motivated_Self 35 0.42 0.27 0.73 1.5
##
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## SS loadings 12.03 7.73 6.35
## Proportion Var 0.24 0.15 0.12
## Cumulative Var 0.24 0.39 0.51
## Proportion Explained 0.46 0.30 0.24
## Cumulative Proportion 0.46 0.76 1.00
##
## With factor correlations of
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## PA1 1.00 0.03 0.28
## PA2 0.03 1.00 -0.14
## PA3 0.28 -0.14 1.00
##
## Mean item complexity = 1.5
## Test of the hypothesis that 3 factors are sufficient.
##
## The degrees of freedom for the null model are 1275 and the objective function was 51.58 with Chi Square of 4186.43
## The degrees of freedom for the model are 1125 and the objective function was 21.01
##
## The root mean square of the residuals (RMSR) is 0.06
## The df corrected root mean square of the residuals is 0.06
##
## The harmonic number of observations is 99 with the empirical chi square 889.72 with prob < 1
## The total number of observations was 100 with Likelihood Chi Square = 1663.28 with prob < 1.5e-23
##
## Tucker Lewis Index of factoring reliability = 0.783
## RMSEA index = 0.093 and the 90 % confidence intervals are 0.062 NA
## BIC = -3517.54
## Fit based upon off diagonal values = 0.97
## Measures of factor score adequacy
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## Correlation of (regression) scores with factors 0.99 0.98 0.97
## Multiple R square of scores with factors 0.97 0.95 0.93
## Minimum correlation of possible factor scores 0.94 0.91 0.87
That helps a bit, but we could drop a few more skewed items…
## Factor Analysis using method = pa
## Call: fa(r = select(selfRateDat_lim2, -matches("SelfPop")), nfactors = 3,
## rotate = "oblimin", scores = "tenBerge", fm = "pa", use = "pairwise.complete.obs")
## Standardized loadings (pattern matrix) based upon correlation matrix
## item PA1 PA2 PA3 h2 u2 com
## insecure_Self 24 0.86 0.74 0.26 1.0
## lonely_Self 28 0.85 0.69 0.31 1.0
## depressed_Self 17 0.85 0.70 0.30 1.0
## awkward_Self 5 0.83 0.63 0.37 1.0
## loner_Self 29 0.71 0.64 0.36 1.2
## plain_Self 32 0.68 0.46 0.54 1.1
## grumpy_Self 21 0.66 0.47 0.59 0.41 2.0
## boring _Self 6 0.65 0.46 0.54 1.0
## shy_Self 39 0.63 0.50 0.50 1.6
## pushover_Self 35 0.59 0.35 0.65 1.0
## jealous_Self 25 0.55 0.36 0.38 0.62 1.8
## confident_Self 11 -0.54 0.42 0.73 0.27 2.2
## poor_Self 33 0.54 -0.29 0.46 0.54 1.7
## dependent_Self 16 0.41 0.15 0.85 1.8
## controlling_Self 13 0.78 0.59 0.41 1.1
## bossy_Self 7 0.78 0.64 0.36 1.3
## cool_Self 14 0.62 0.30 0.69 0.31 1.8
## risky_Self 36 0.60 0.36 0.64 1.1
## admired_Self 1 -0.29 0.59 0.66 0.34 1.8
## daring_Self 15 0.56 0.39 0.61 1.1
## adventurous_Self 2 0.54 0.52 0.48 1.8
## leader_Self 27 0.53 0.49 0.51 1.7
## popular_Self 34 -0.45 0.53 0.72 0.28 2.3
## social_Self 40 -0.45 0.52 0.71 0.29 2.2
## flirty_Self 18 -0.38 0.52 0.53 0.47 1.8
## trendy_Self 43 -0.51 0.51 0.68 0.32 2.0
## selfish_Self 38 0.33 0.49 -0.40 0.49 0.51 2.7
## outgoing_Self 30 -0.37 0.49 0.52 0.48 2.0
## stubborn_Self 41 0.32 0.48 0.24 0.76 1.7
## attractive_Self 4 -0.35 0.46 0.31 0.62 0.38 2.7
## lazy_Self 26 0.34 0.37 0.28 0.72 2.6
## funny_Self 19 -0.31 0.35 0.42 0.58 2.9
## athletic_Self 3 0.19 0.81 2.7
## considerate_Self 12 0.85 0.66 0.34 1.1
## helpful_Self 22 0.85 0.71 0.29 1.1
## genuine_Self 20 0.76 0.55 0.45 1.0
## caring_Self 9 0.76 0.57 0.43 1.0
## humble_Self 23 0.66 0.45 0.55 1.4
## calm_Self 8 0.64 0.48 0.52 1.1
## patient_Self 31 0.57 0.45 0.55 1.5
## rule-follower_Self 37 0.48 0.22 0.78 1.4
## comforting_Self 10 0.45 0.39 0.61 1.8
## studious_Self 42 0.44 0.18 0.82 1.1
##
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## SS loadings 9.22 6.83 5.84
## Proportion Var 0.21 0.16 0.14
## Cumulative Var 0.21 0.37 0.51
## Proportion Explained 0.42 0.31 0.27
## Cumulative Proportion 0.42 0.73 1.00
##
## With factor correlations of
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## PA1 1.00 -0.28 -0.36
## PA2 -0.28 1.00 0.04
## PA3 -0.36 0.04 1.00
##
## Mean item complexity = 1.6
## Test of the hypothesis that 3 factors are sufficient.
##
## The degrees of freedom for the null model are 903 and the objective function was 39.18 with Chi Square of 3284.28
## The degrees of freedom for the model are 777 and the objective function was 14.43
##
## The root mean square of the residuals (RMSR) is 0.06
## The df corrected root mean square of the residuals is 0.06
##
## The harmonic number of observations is 99 with the empirical chi square 614.34 with prob < 1
## The total number of observations was 100 with Likelihood Chi Square = 1180.47 with prob < 3.4e-19
##
## Tucker Lewis Index of factoring reliability = 0.796
## RMSEA index = 0.092 and the 90 % confidence intervals are 0.064 NA
## BIC = -2397.75
## Fit based upon off diagonal values = 0.97
## Measures of factor score adequacy
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## Correlation of (regression) scores with factors 0.98 0.97 0.97
## Multiple R square of scores with factors 0.96 0.94 0.93
## Minimum correlation of possible factor scores 0.92 0.88 0.86
I’m going to trim just a couple items for low loadings, or high cross loadings
athletic_Self 3 0.19 0.81 2.7
trendy_Self 43 -0.51 0.51 0.68 0.32 2.0
selfish_Self 38 0.33 0.49 -0.40 0.49 0.51 2.7
## Factor Analysis using method = pa
## Call: fa(r = select(selfRateDat_lim3, -matches("SelfPop")), nfactors = 3,
## rotate = "oblimin", scores = "tenBerge", fm = "pa", use = "pairwise.complete.obs")
## Standardized loadings (pattern matrix) based upon correlation matrix
## item PA1 PA2 PA3 h2 u2 com
## lonely_Self 27 0.83 0.69 0.31 1.0
## depressed_Self 16 0.83 0.69 0.31 1.0
## insecure_Self 23 0.83 0.73 0.27 1.0
## awkward_Self 4 0.82 0.62 0.38 1.0
## grumpy_Self 20 0.69 0.44 0.59 0.41 1.9
## loner_Self 28 0.67 0.65 0.35 1.3
## plain_Self 31 0.66 0.46 0.54 1.1
## boring _Self 5 0.64 0.46 0.54 1.0
## pushover_Self 34 0.60 0.36 0.64 1.0
## shy_Self 37 0.59 -0.31 0.51 0.49 1.9
## jealous_Self 24 0.58 0.34 0.39 0.61 1.7
## poor_Self 32 0.55 -0.30 0.48 0.52 1.6
## confident_Self 10 -0.50 0.47 0.73 0.27 2.3
## dependent_Self 15 0.41 0.14 0.86 1.7
## lazy_Self 25 0.37 0.35 0.27 0.73 2.6
## controlling_Self 12 0.78 0.58 0.42 1.2
## bossy_Self 6 0.76 0.61 0.39 1.4
## cool_Self 13 0.66 0.68 0.32 1.5
## admired_Self 1 0.63 0.65 0.35 1.6
## risky_Self 35 0.62 0.37 0.63 1.2
## daring_Self 14 0.60 0.41 0.59 1.1
## adventurous_Self 2 0.59 0.52 0.48 1.5
## social_Self 38 -0.40 0.57 0.72 0.28 2.0
## popular_Self 33 -0.40 0.57 0.72 0.28 2.0
## flirty_Self 17 -0.33 0.57 0.54 0.46 1.6
## leader_Self 26 0.55 0.48 0.52 1.4
## outgoing_Self 29 -0.32 0.53 0.53 0.47 1.7
## attractive_Self 3 -0.32 0.50 0.30 0.62 0.38 2.4
## stubborn_Self 39 0.34 0.46 0.23 0.77 1.8
## funny_Self 18 0.39 0.42 0.58 2.6
## considerate_Self 11 0.85 0.67 0.33 1.1
## helpful_Self 21 0.83 0.70 0.30 1.1
## caring_Self 8 0.76 0.58 0.42 1.0
## genuine_Self 19 0.76 0.55 0.45 1.0
## humble_Self 22 0.66 0.44 0.56 1.4
## calm_Self 7 0.64 0.49 0.51 1.1
## patient_Self 30 0.57 0.44 0.56 1.5
## rule-follower_Self 36 0.48 0.22 0.78 1.3
## comforting_Self 9 0.45 0.40 0.60 1.9
## studious_Self 40 0.44 0.18 0.82 1.1
##
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## SS loadings 8.31 6.75 5.46
## Proportion Var 0.21 0.17 0.14
## Cumulative Var 0.21 0.38 0.51
## Proportion Explained 0.41 0.33 0.27
## Cumulative Proportion 0.41 0.73 1.00
##
## With factor correlations of
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## PA1 1.00 -0.30 -0.34
## PA2 -0.30 1.00 0.07
## PA3 -0.34 0.07 1.00
##
## Mean item complexity = 1.5
## Test of the hypothesis that 3 factors are sufficient.
##
## The degrees of freedom for the null model are 780 and the objective function was 35.12 with Chi Square of 2978.99
## The degrees of freedom for the model are 663 and the objective function was 12.29
##
## The root mean square of the residuals (RMSR) is 0.06
## The df corrected root mean square of the residuals is 0.06
##
## The harmonic number of observations is 99 with the empirical chi square 520.47 with prob < 1
## The total number of observations was 100 with Likelihood Chi Square = 1017.64 with prob < 1.9e-17
##
## Tucker Lewis Index of factoring reliability = 0.804
## RMSEA index = 0.092 and the 90 % confidence intervals are 0.064 NA
## BIC = -2035.59
## Fit based upon off diagonal values = 0.97
## Measures of factor score adequacy
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## Correlation of (regression) scores with factors 0.98 0.97 0.96
## Multiple R square of scores with factors 0.95 0.94 0.92
## Minimum correlation of possible factor scores 0.91 0.88 0.85
These clusters of items may be related to status We can correlate self rated accepted and controversial status with the factor scores to start exploring this.
In the output below, SelfPop_1 is controversial, and SelfPop_2 is accepted.
Controversial status is significantly positively correlated with dynamism and negativity, and negatively with prosociality.
Accepted status is significantly positively associated with dynamism and negatively with negativity, and non-significantly correlated with prosociality.
## Call:corr.test(x = as.data.frame(selfPopDat), y = as.data.frame(predict(selfRateFA,
## selfRateDat_nopop_imputed, missing = T, use = "pairwise.complete.obs")),
## use = "pairwise.complete.obs", adjust = "none")
## Correlation matrix
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## SelfPop_1 0.19 0.41 -0.28
## SelfPop_2 -0.64 0.49 0.26
## Sample Size
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## SelfPop_1 98 98 98
## SelfPop_2 100 100 100
## PA1 PA2 PA3
## SelfPop_1 0.07 0 0.01
## SelfPop_2 0.00 0 0.01
##
## To see confidence intervals of the correlations, print with the short=FALSE option
Grain of salt: No correction for multiple comparison here.
Slightly bigger grain of salt: 8 folks are missing a rating on a couple items here and there, so I impute the mean so we can get predicted factor scores. This means that significance values and CIs close to threshold below should be treated lightly (but it doesn’t change things too much).
This gets more interesting in the regressions.
Here’s the raw output for regressing controversial status on the component scores – see below for a table with CIs.
##
## Call: rlm(formula = selfPopDat[, c("SelfPop_1")] ~ predict(selfRateFA,
## selfRateDat_nopop_imputed))
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -2.92187 -0.79252 -0.09251 0.73451 3.46324
##
## Coefficients:
## Value Std. Error
## (Intercept) 2.3636 0.1394
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA1 0.4374 0.1559
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA2 0.8530 0.1466
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA3 -0.3950 0.1484
## t value
## (Intercept) 16.9610
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA1 2.8052
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA2 5.8183
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA3 -2.6622
##
## Residual standard error: 1.137 on 94 degrees of freedom
## (2 observations deleted due to missingness)
Results from bootstrap estimates: Controversial status is significantly negatively predicted by the prosocial component and significantly positively predicited by the dominant-agressive component.
| component | est | lower 95% | upper 95% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.44 | 0.09 | 0.73 |
| 2 | 0.85 | 0.48 | 1.20 |
| 3 | -0.39 | -0.77 | -0.11 |
Here’s the raw output for an rlm of accepted status on the component scores. Again, scroll down for a nice table.
##
## Call: rlm(formula = selfPopDat[, c("SelfPop_2")] ~ predict(selfRateFA,
## selfRateDat_nopop_imputed))
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -3.07814 -0.64866 0.04891 0.59934 2.07161
##
## Coefficients:
## Value Std. Error
## (Intercept) 3.5627 0.1197
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA1 -0.8577 0.1341
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA2 0.6676 0.1266
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA3 0.0819 0.1281
## t value
## (Intercept) 29.7527
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA1 -6.3936
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA2 5.2748
## predict(selfRateFA, selfRateDat_nopop_imputed)PA3 0.6396
##
## Residual standard error: 0.9 on 96 degrees of freedom
Accepted status is significantly predicted by higher prosociality, less depression/negativity, and more dominance/aggression.
| component | est | lower 95% | upper 95% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -0.86 | -1.18 | -0.53 |
| 2 | 0.67 | 0.28 | 0.95 |
| 3 | 0.08 | -0.15 | 0.31 |
Well, we have three factors that are helpfully related to self reported status. This is what we want. All three factors seem relevant.
The above was all tested with factor scores, but we’ll be using scale scores. Let’s test that:
Looking at the distribution of both sets of items (those cleaned by removing items with bad loadings, versus those cleaned by removing skewed items first) indicates that both have a factor that has a skewed distribution. So we haven’t gained anything there. Additionally, both seem to predict the two different kinds status.
The prosocial factor in the first cleaned set has more items than that in the second set. For the fMRI paradigm, it will be helpful to be able to use this larger set.
Below I’ll test the factor scores (binarized, as we’ll get off the scanner) to predict the two status types.
See raw summary, and below that, tables of bootstrapped CIs.
##
## Call: rlm(formula = SelfPop_1 ~ 1 + agressive + awkward + calm, data = selfRateFAScaleScores)
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -2.5651 -0.6330 -0.2648 0.7861 3.3393
##
## Coefficients:
## Value Std. Error t value
## (Intercept) 1.8999 0.7843 2.4225
## agressive 3.2749 0.5502 5.9524
## awkward -0.0978 0.4259 -0.2297
## calm -0.6259 0.7700 -0.8128
##
## Residual standard error: 1.06 on 94 degrees of freedom
## (2 observations deleted due to missingness)
##
## Call: rlm(formula = SelfPop_2 ~ 1 + agressive + awkward + calm, data = selfRateFAScaleScores)
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -3.0069 -1.0585 0.2344 1.0033 2.5296
##
## Coefficients:
## Value Std. Error t value
## (Intercept) 3.9186 0.8191 4.7840
## agressive 0.7777 0.5734 1.3563
## awkward -2.9178 0.4441 -6.5701
## calm 0.7352 0.8023 0.9164
##
## Residual standard error: 1.554 on 96 degrees of freedom
## Call:corr.test(x = select(selfRateFAScaleScores, matches("SelfPop")),
## y = select(selfRateFAScaleScores, agressive, awkward, calm),
## use = "pairwise.complete.obs", method = "kendall", adjust = "none")
## Correlation matrix
## agressive awkward calm
## SelfPop_1 0.42 0.05 -0.34
## SelfPop_2 0.02 -0.47 0.18
## Sample Size
## agressive awkward calm
## SelfPop_1 98 98 98
## SelfPop_2 100 100 100
## agressive awkward calm
## SelfPop_1 0.00 0.64 0.00
## SelfPop_2 0.84 0.00 0.07
##
## To see confidence intervals of the correlations, print with the short=FALSE option
| est | lower 95% | upper 95% | |
|---|---|---|---|
| d[, 2:col]agressive | 3.27 | 1.92 | 4.56 |
| d[, 2:col]awkward | -0.10 | -0.78 | 0.65 |
| d[, 2:col]calm | -0.63 | -2.76 | 0.82 |
| est | lower 95% | upper 95% | |
|---|---|---|---|
| d[, 2:col]agressive | 0.78 | -0.70 | 2.01 |
| d[, 2:col]awkward | -2.92 | -3.70 | -2.06 |
| d[, 2:col]calm | 0.74 | -1.13 | 2.04 |
We see that, controlling for the other factors, high ratings on the agressive traits tends to predict high controversial popular status, while low ratings on the awkward traits tends to predict high ratings on prosocial status.
This CFA is not performed on an independent data set.
## calm=~calm_Self+caring_Self+considerate_Self+fair_Self+friendly_Self+genuine_Self+giving_Self+helpful_Self+honest_Self+humble_Self+loyal_Self+motivated_Self+nice_Self+respectful_Self+rulefollower_Self+smart_Self+studious_Self+sympathetic_Self+trustworthy_Self+welcoming_Self
## awkward=~awkward_Self+boring_Self+confident_Self+depressed_Self+insecure_Self+lonely_Self+loner_Self+plain_Self+pushover_Self+shy_Self+ugly_Self
## agressive=~agressive_Self+bossy_Self+controlling_Self+lazy_Self+risky_Self+rude_Self+selfish_Self+snobby_Self+stubborn_Self
## lavaan 0.6-3 ended normally after 48 iterations
##
## Optimization method NLMINB
## Number of free parameters 83
##
## Used Total
## Number of observations 94 100
##
## Estimator ML
## Model Fit Test Statistic 1417.575
## Degrees of freedom 737
## P-value (Chi-square) 0.000
##
## Model test baseline model:
##
## Minimum Function Test Statistic 3402.436
## Degrees of freedom 780
## P-value 0.000
##
## User model versus baseline model:
##
## Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 0.740
## Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) 0.725
##
## Loglikelihood and Information Criteria:
##
## Loglikelihood user model (H0) -5440.336
## Loglikelihood unrestricted model (H1) -4731.549
##
## Number of free parameters 83
## Akaike (AIC) 11046.672
## Bayesian (BIC) 11257.766
## Sample-size adjusted Bayesian (BIC) 10995.735
##
## Root Mean Square Error of Approximation:
##
## RMSEA 0.099
## 90 Percent Confidence Interval 0.091 0.107
## P-value RMSEA <= 0.05 0.000
##
## Standardized Root Mean Square Residual:
##
## SRMR 0.105
##
## Parameter Estimates:
##
## Information Expected
## Information saturated (h1) model Structured
## Standard Errors Standard
##
## Latent Variables:
## Estimate Std.Err z-value P(>|z|) Std.lv Std.all
## calm =~
## calm_Self 1.000 0.716 0.619
## caring_Self 1.180 0.183 6.436 0.000 0.844 0.801
## considerat_Slf 1.156 0.178 6.505 0.000 0.827 0.813
## fair_Self 1.233 0.214 5.758 0.000 0.883 0.690
## friendly_Self 1.288 0.207 6.216 0.000 0.921 0.764
## genuine_Self 1.180 0.191 6.166 0.000 0.844 0.755
## giving_Self 1.287 0.211 6.114 0.000 0.921 0.747
## helpful_Self 1.199 0.185 6.490 0.000 0.858 0.811
## honest_Self 1.034 0.199 5.187 0.000 0.740 0.605
## humble_Self 0.915 0.197 4.636 0.000 0.655 0.529
## loyal_Self 1.134 0.200 5.670 0.000 0.811 0.677
## motivated_Self 0.900 0.202 4.452 0.000 0.644 0.505
## nice_Self 1.175 0.173 6.799 0.000 0.841 0.867
## respectful_Slf 0.874 0.177 4.941 0.000 0.625 0.571
## rulefollwr_Slf 0.753 0.207 3.635 0.000 0.539 0.402
## smart_Self 0.681 0.155 4.388 0.000 0.487 0.496
## studious_Self 0.751 0.194 3.867 0.000 0.538 0.430
## sympathetc_Slf 1.371 0.226 6.068 0.000 0.981 0.739
## trustwrthy_Slf 1.178 0.185 6.352 0.000 0.843 0.787
## welcoming_Self 1.349 0.211 6.392 0.000 0.965 0.794
## awkward =~
## awkward_Self 1.000 1.316 0.778
## boring_Self 0.782 0.112 6.973 0.000 1.030 0.681
## confident_Self -0.907 0.116 -7.850 0.000 -1.194 -0.751
## depressed_Self 1.060 0.118 8.953 0.000 1.395 0.834
## insecure_Self 1.168 0.124 9.412 0.000 1.537 0.867
## lonely_Self 1.063 0.116 9.149 0.000 1.399 0.848
## loner_Self 1.065 0.123 8.683 0.000 1.402 0.815
## plain_Self 0.837 0.117 7.145 0.000 1.101 0.695
## pushover_Self 0.726 0.125 5.821 0.000 0.955 0.582
## shy_Self 0.801 0.130 6.169 0.000 1.054 0.613
## ugly_Self 0.717 0.109 6.598 0.000 0.943 0.650
## agressive =~
## agressive_Self 1.000 1.067 0.754
## bossy_Self 1.096 0.144 7.605 0.000 1.170 0.777
## controllng_Slf 1.003 0.143 7.001 0.000 1.070 0.720
## lazy_Self 0.739 0.147 5.013 0.000 0.788 0.528
## risky_Self 0.573 0.144 3.983 0.000 0.612 0.424
## rude_Self 0.933 0.120 7.747 0.000 0.995 0.790
## selfish_Self 0.910 0.132 6.898 0.000 0.971 0.711
## snobby_Self 1.127 0.140 8.057 0.000 1.202 0.819
## stubborn_Self 0.572 0.158 3.614 0.000 0.610 0.386
##
## Covariances:
## Estimate Std.Err z-value P(>|z|) Std.lv Std.all
## calm ~~
## awkward -0.298 0.116 -2.563 0.010 -0.317 -0.317
## agressive -0.361 0.109 -3.316 0.001 -0.473 -0.473
## awkward ~~
## agressive 0.128 0.158 0.810 0.418 0.091 0.091
##
## Variances:
## Estimate Std.Err z-value P(>|z|) Std.lv Std.all
## .calm_Self 0.823 0.123 6.666 0.000 0.823 0.616
## .caring_Self 0.397 0.063 6.307 0.000 0.397 0.358
## .considerat_Slf 0.350 0.056 6.258 0.000 0.350 0.338
## .fair_Self 0.856 0.130 6.578 0.000 0.856 0.524
## .friendly_Self 0.606 0.094 6.428 0.000 0.606 0.417
## .genuine_Self 0.536 0.083 6.450 0.000 0.536 0.429
## .giving_Self 0.672 0.104 6.470 0.000 0.672 0.442
## .helpful_Self 0.384 0.061 6.269 0.000 0.384 0.343
## .honest_Self 0.947 0.142 6.679 0.000 0.947 0.634
## .humble_Self 1.103 0.164 6.737 0.000 1.103 0.720
## .loyal_Self 0.780 0.118 6.598 0.000 0.780 0.542
## .motivated_Self 1.215 0.180 6.752 0.000 1.215 0.745
## .nice_Self 0.234 0.039 5.931 0.000 0.234 0.249
## .respectful_Slf 0.810 0.121 6.709 0.000 0.810 0.674
## .rulefollwr_Slf 1.509 0.222 6.797 0.000 1.509 0.839
## .smart_Self 0.725 0.107 6.756 0.000 0.725 0.754
## .studious_Self 1.273 0.188 6.787 0.000 1.273 0.815
## .sympathetc_Slf 0.798 0.123 6.488 0.000 0.798 0.453
## .trustwrthy_Slf 0.437 0.069 6.359 0.000 0.437 0.381
## .welcoming_Self 0.547 0.086 6.335 0.000 0.547 0.370
## .awkward_Self 1.126 0.181 6.210 0.000 1.126 0.394
## .boring_Self 1.225 0.189 6.494 0.000 1.225 0.536
## .confident_Self 1.099 0.174 6.312 0.000 1.099 0.435
## .depressed_Self 0.850 0.144 5.892 0.000 0.850 0.304
## .insecure_Self 0.781 0.140 5.580 0.000 0.781 0.248
## .lonely_Self 0.763 0.132 5.774 0.000 0.763 0.280
## .loner_Self 0.997 0.165 6.026 0.000 0.997 0.337
## .plain_Self 1.297 0.201 6.464 0.000 1.297 0.517
## .pushover_Self 1.779 0.268 6.641 0.000 1.779 0.661
## .shy_Self 1.846 0.280 6.604 0.000 1.846 0.624
## .ugly_Self 1.219 0.186 6.550 0.000 1.219 0.578
## .agressive_Self 0.865 0.146 5.913 0.000 0.865 0.432
## .bossy_Self 0.900 0.156 5.764 0.000 0.900 0.397
## .controllng_Slf 1.061 0.174 6.084 0.000 1.061 0.481
## .lazy_Self 1.605 0.244 6.580 0.000 1.605 0.721
## .risky_Self 1.708 0.255 6.700 0.000 1.708 0.820
## .rude_Self 0.598 0.106 5.664 0.000 0.598 0.376
## .selfish_Self 0.922 0.151 6.125 0.000 0.922 0.495
## .snobby_Self 0.712 0.132 5.395 0.000 0.712 0.330
## .stubborn_Self 2.129 0.316 6.732 0.000 2.129 0.851
## calm 0.512 0.156 3.282 0.001 1.000 1.000
## awkward 1.732 0.391 4.432 0.000 1.000 1.000
## agressive 1.138 0.274 4.157 0.000 1.000 1.000
Ultimately, when we reduce the items to scale scores, only the strongest predictors survive (though note the correlations above among the different factors). Aggression, all else equal, predicts Controversial High Status. Awkwardness (similar, probably, to Extraversion), all else equal, predicts accepted status.
We can examine reliability of the latent variables and scale scores. Of course, these will be inflated because we’ve selected variable sets that are highly correlated.
## calm awkward agressive total
## alpha 0.9411144 0.8572672 0.8704910 0.7542231
## omega 0.9411100 0.9021307 0.8727198 0.8491448
## omega2 0.9411100 0.9021307 0.8727198 0.8491448
## omega3 0.9267801 0.8933607 0.8618855 0.7556667
## avevar 0.4525898 0.5607947 0.4443711 0.4926990
##
## Reliability analysis
## Call: alpha(x = dataCFA[, itemScaleGroupsCFA$item[itemScaleGroupsCFA$maxPA ==
## "PA1"]], check.keys = T)
##
## raw_alpha std.alpha G6(smc) average_r S/N ase mean sd median_r
## 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.44 16 0.0089 4.6 0.8 0.44
##
## lower alpha upper 95% confidence boundaries
## 0.92 0.94 0.96
##
## Reliability if an item is dropped:
## raw_alpha std.alpha G6(smc) average_r S/N alpha se var.r
## calm_Self 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.45 15 0.0092 0.018
## caring_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0095 0.017
## considerate_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.43 15 0.0096 0.017
## fair_Self 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0094 0.018
## friendly_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0095 0.017
## genuine_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0096 0.018
## giving_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0095 0.018
## helpful_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0095 0.016
## honest_Self 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.45 15 0.0092 0.019
## humble_Self 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.45 16 0.0090 0.018
## loyal_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0094 0.019
## motivated_Self 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.45 16 0.0090 0.018
## nice_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.43 14 0.0096 0.016
## respectful_Self 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.45 15 0.0092 0.019
## rulefollower_Self 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.46 16 0.0087 0.016
## smart_Self 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.46 16 0.0090 0.017
## studious_Self 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.46 16 0.0088 0.017
## sympathetic_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0095 0.017
## trustworthy_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0095 0.017
## welcoming_Self 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.44 15 0.0096 0.017
## med.r
## calm_Self 0.44
## caring_Self 0.44
## considerate_Self 0.43
## fair_Self 0.44
## friendly_Self 0.43
## genuine_Self 0.43
## giving_Self 0.44
## helpful_Self 0.44
## honest_Self 0.45
## humble_Self 0.45
## loyal_Self 0.44
## motivated_Self 0.45
## nice_Self 0.43
## respectful_Self 0.44
## rulefollower_Self 0.45
## smart_Self 0.45
## studious_Self 0.45
## sympathetic_Self 0.44
## trustworthy_Self 0.43
## welcoming_Self 0.43
##
## Item statistics
## n raw.r std.r r.cor r.drop mean sd
## calm_Self 99 0.65 0.65 0.63 0.60 4.4 1.17
## caring_Self 100 0.76 0.77 0.76 0.73 4.7 1.09
## considerate_Self 100 0.79 0.80 0.80 0.76 4.8 1.03
## fair_Self 100 0.72 0.71 0.70 0.67 4.6 1.26
## friendly_Self 100 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.71 4.7 1.26
## genuine_Self 100 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.75 4.7 1.10
## giving_Self 100 0.73 0.72 0.71 0.69 4.6 1.26
## helpful_Self 100 0.77 0.78 0.78 0.74 4.8 1.06
## honest_Self 99 0.64 0.64 0.62 0.59 4.6 1.20
## humble_Self 100 0.57 0.57 0.54 0.51 4.4 1.24
## loyal_Self 100 0.72 0.72 0.70 0.68 4.8 1.20
## motivated_Self 99 0.57 0.57 0.54 0.52 4.4 1.29
## nice_Self 100 0.82 0.83 0.83 0.80 4.9 0.98
## respectful_Self 100 0.64 0.64 0.62 0.60 4.9 1.09
## rulefollower_Self 100 0.51 0.49 0.46 0.44 4.3 1.35
## smart_Self 98 0.51 0.52 0.50 0.46 4.9 0.98
## studious_Self 100 0.53 0.52 0.49 0.47 4.4 1.28
## sympathetic_Self 99 0.75 0.74 0.74 0.71 4.5 1.30
## trustworthy_Self 100 0.75 0.76 0.76 0.73 4.8 1.05
## welcoming_Self 100 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.72 4.5 1.20
##
## Non missing response frequency for each item
## 1 2 3 4 5 6 miss
## calm_Self 0.01 0.07 0.10 0.28 0.35 0.18 0.01
## caring_Self 0.00 0.04 0.08 0.27 0.32 0.29 0.00
## considerate_Self 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.25 0.34 0.30 0.00
## fair_Self 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.25 0.34 0.27 0.00
## friendly_Self 0.01 0.08 0.09 0.17 0.37 0.28 0.00
## genuine_Self 0.00 0.04 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.00
## giving_Self 0.01 0.10 0.03 0.31 0.28 0.27 0.00
## helpful_Self 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.27 0.34 0.29 0.00
## honest_Self 0.01 0.06 0.11 0.20 0.37 0.24 0.01
## humble_Self 0.04 0.02 0.15 0.31 0.29 0.19 0.00
## loyal_Self 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.17 0.39 0.30 0.00
## motivated_Self 0.03 0.07 0.08 0.28 0.31 0.22 0.01
## nice_Self 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.21 0.43 0.28 0.00
## respectful_Self 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.19 0.42 0.30 0.00
## rulefollower_Self 0.04 0.08 0.11 0.29 0.27 0.21 0.00
## smart_Self 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.21 0.43 0.30 0.02
## studious_Self 0.02 0.07 0.13 0.31 0.24 0.23 0.00
## sympathetic_Self 0.04 0.04 0.11 0.21 0.35 0.24 0.01
## trustworthy_Self 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.25 0.38 0.29 0.00
## welcoming_Self 0.02 0.05 0.11 0.21 0.40 0.21 0.00
##
## Reliability analysis
## Call: alpha(x = dataCFA[, itemScaleGroupsCFA$item[itemScaleGroupsCFA$maxPA ==
## "PA2"]], check.keys = T)
##
## raw_alpha std.alpha G6(smc) average_r S/N ase mean sd median_r
## 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.54 13 0.011 3.2 1.2 0.54
##
## lower alpha upper 95% confidence boundaries
## 0.91 0.93 0.95
##
## Reliability if an item is dropped:
## raw_alpha std.alpha G6(smc) average_r S/N alpha se var.r
## awkward_Self 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.53 11 0.012 0.0109
## boring_Self 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.55 12 0.011 0.0111
## confident_Self- 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.54 12 0.012 0.0103
## depressed_Self 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.53 11 0.012 0.0094
## insecure_Self 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.52 11 0.012 0.0092
## lonely_Self 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.52 11 0.012 0.0099
## loner_Self 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.53 11 0.012 0.0108
## plain_Self 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.55 12 0.011 0.0112
## pushover_Self 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.56 13 0.011 0.0106
## shy_Self 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.56 13 0.011 0.0100
## ugly_Self 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.55 12 0.011 0.0108
## med.r
## awkward_Self 0.52
## boring_Self 0.55
## confident_Self- 0.54
## depressed_Self 0.52
## insecure_Self 0.51
## lonely_Self 0.51
## loner_Self 0.51
## plain_Self 0.54
## pushover_Self 0.57
## shy_Self 0.55
## ugly_Self 0.55
##
## Item statistics
## n raw.r std.r r.cor r.drop mean sd
## awkward_Self 100 0.79 0.79 0.78 0.74 3.6 1.7
## boring_Self 100 0.72 0.72 0.69 0.66 2.8 1.5
## confident_Self- 99 0.76 0.75 0.73 0.70 3.3 1.6
## depressed_Self 99 0.83 0.82 0.81 0.78 3.0 1.7
## insecure_Self 100 0.86 0.85 0.85 0.82 3.5 1.8
## lonely_Self 100 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.81 3.2 1.7
## loner_Self 100 0.84 0.84 0.83 0.79 3.1 1.7
## plain_Self 99 0.73 0.73 0.69 0.66 3.2 1.6
## pushover_Self 99 0.66 0.66 0.61 0.58 3.0 1.7
## shy_Self 100 0.67 0.67 0.62 0.60 3.9 1.7
## ugly_Self 100 0.69 0.70 0.66 0.63 2.4 1.4
##
## Non missing response frequency for each item
## 1 2 3 4 5 6 miss
## awkward_Self 0.18 0.12 0.10 0.26 0.20 0.14 0.00
## boring_Self 0.27 0.23 0.15 0.21 0.09 0.05 0.00
## confident_Self 0.11 0.14 0.18 0.22 0.20 0.14 0.01
## depressed_Self 0.26 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.01
## insecure_Self 0.19 0.15 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00
## lonely_Self 0.22 0.16 0.19 0.21 0.10 0.12 0.00
## loner_Self 0.25 0.18 0.14 0.18 0.13 0.12 0.00
## plain_Self 0.18 0.17 0.22 0.18 0.14 0.10 0.01
## pushover_Self 0.27 0.18 0.10 0.21 0.17 0.06 0.01
## shy_Self 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.19 0.20 0.22 0.00
## ugly_Self 0.35 0.27 0.17 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.00
##
## Reliability analysis
## Call: alpha(x = dataCFA[, itemScaleGroupsCFA$item[itemScaleGroupsCFA$maxPA ==
## "PA3"]], check.keys = T)
##
## raw_alpha std.alpha G6(smc) average_r S/N ase mean sd median_r
## 0.87 0.87 0.88 0.43 6.9 0.019 2.6 1 0.41
##
## lower alpha upper 95% confidence boundaries
## 0.83 0.87 0.91
##
## Reliability if an item is dropped:
## raw_alpha std.alpha G6(smc) average_r S/N alpha se var.r
## agressive_Self 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.42 5.8 0.023 0.022
## bossy_Self 0.84 0.85 0.85 0.41 5.5 0.024 0.022
## controlling_Self 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.42 5.7 0.023 0.024
## lazy_Self 0.87 0.87 0.88 0.46 6.8 0.020 0.021
## risky_Self 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.47 7.1 0.019 0.020
## rude_Self 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.42 5.8 0.023 0.019
## selfish_Self 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.42 5.9 0.022 0.025
## snobby_Self 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.42 5.7 0.023 0.021
## stubborn_Self 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.47 7.1 0.019 0.020
## med.r
## agressive_Self 0.39
## bossy_Self 0.39
## controlling_Self 0.39
## lazy_Self 0.47
## risky_Self 0.52
## rude_Self 0.39
## selfish_Self 0.39
## snobby_Self 0.39
## stubborn_Self 0.52
##
## Item statistics
## n raw.r std.r r.cor r.drop mean sd
## agressive_Self 99 0.76 0.77 0.74 0.69 2.3 1.4
## bossy_Self 100 0.81 0.81 0.80 0.75 2.6 1.5
## controlling_Self 100 0.78 0.78 0.76 0.70 2.6 1.5
## lazy_Self 99 0.60 0.59 0.52 0.47 2.6 1.5
## risky_Self 100 0.54 0.54 0.45 0.42 2.9 1.4
## rude_Self 100 0.77 0.77 0.76 0.69 2.2 1.3
## selfish_Self 99 0.74 0.75 0.71 0.66 2.6 1.4
## snobby_Self 99 0.78 0.78 0.76 0.70 2.3 1.5
## stubborn_Self 100 0.56 0.55 0.47 0.42 3.5 1.6
##
## Non missing response frequency for each item
## 1 2 3 4 5 6 miss
## agressive_Self 0.42 0.16 0.19 0.12 0.08 0.02 0.01
## bossy_Self 0.32 0.22 0.16 0.17 0.09 0.04 0.00
## controlling_Self 0.29 0.29 0.12 0.17 0.09 0.04 0.00
## lazy_Self 0.31 0.24 0.12 0.19 0.08 0.05 0.01
## risky_Self 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.18 0.12 0.04 0.00
## rude_Self 0.43 0.23 0.15 0.12 0.07 0.00 0.00
## selfish_Self 0.28 0.24 0.16 0.19 0.10 0.02 0.01
## snobby_Self 0.43 0.20 0.09 0.17 0.08 0.02 0.01
## stubborn_Self 0.15 0.13 0.22 0.20 0.18 0.12 0.00
We ultimately were not able to exclude as many items as we wanted to. Through discussion we decided to keep a subset of items that had been rejected from set 1 or set 2. This EFA examines this larger set:
## Factor Analysis using method = pa
## Call: fa(r = freshSelfRate, nfactors = 3, rotate = "oblimin", scores = "tenBerge",
## fm = "pa", use = "pairwise.complete.obs")
## Standardized loadings (pattern matrix) based upon correlation matrix
## item PA3 PA1 PA2 h2 u2 com
## insecure_Self 18 0.87 0.73 0.27 1.1
## lonely_Self 19 0.85 0.71 0.29 1.2
## depressed_Self 20 0.84 0.71 0.29 1.2
## awkward_Self 21 0.79 0.60 0.40 1.2
## loner_Self 22 0.79 0.66 0.34 1.0
## confident_Self 26 -0.75 0.74 0.26 1.3
## trendy_Self 29 -0.74 0.31 0.69 0.31 1.4
## shy_Self 24 0.70 0.45 0.55 1.2
## popular_Self 31 -0.69 0.32 0.73 0.27 1.7
## social_Self 30 -0.68 0.33 0.72 0.28 1.8
## plain_Self 23 0.67 0.43 0.57 1.0
## boring_Self 25 0.63 0.45 0.55 1.2
## flirty_Self 32 -0.62 0.31 0.52 0.48 1.5
## outgoing_Self 33 -0.60 0.52 0.48 1.6
## ugly_Self 28 0.58 0.47 0.53 1.3
## attractive_Self 47 -0.57 0.35 0.60 0.40 2.1
## pushover_Self 27 0.56 0.33 0.67 1.2
## cool_Self 48 -0.56 0.43 0.63 0.37 2.4
## nice_Self 2 0.84 0.73 0.27 1.0
## considerate_Self 1 0.84 0.70 0.30 1.1
## helpful_Self 3 0.79 0.65 0.35 1.0
## caring_Self 5 0.78 0.62 0.38 1.0
## genuine_Self 4 0.76 0.57 0.43 1.0
## loyal_Self 8 0.74 0.50 0.50 1.1
## friendly_Self 6 0.73 0.60 0.40 1.0
## sympathetic_Self 10 0.72 0.54 0.46 1.0
## giving_Self 9 0.72 0.53 0.47 1.0
## trustworthy_Self 7 0.72 0.58 0.42 1.0
## welcoming_Self 11 0.70 0.59 0.41 1.1
## fair_Self 12 0.60 0.47 0.53 1.2
## respectful_Self 13 0.55 0.33 0.67 1.0
## calm_Self 14 0.55 0.43 0.57 1.3
## humble_Self 16 0.54 0.37 0.63 1.8
## honest_Self 15 0.50 0.40 0.60 1.5
## motivated_Self 17 0.45 0.27 0.73 1.3
## controlling_Self 34 0.76 0.63 0.37 1.1
## bossy_Self 35 0.75 0.63 0.37 1.2
## snobby_Self 40 -0.29 0.71 0.68 0.32 1.3
## mean_Self 37 -0.30 0.71 0.68 0.32 1.4
## rude_Self 41 0.71 0.63 0.37 1.2
## angry_Self 36 0.34 0.70 0.64 0.36 1.5
## agressive_Self 39 0.67 0.56 0.44 1.2
## grumpy_Self 38 0.45 0.65 0.63 0.37 1.8
## selfish_Self 42 0.61 0.53 0.47 1.4
## jealous_Self 43 0.42 0.54 0.44 0.56 1.9
## stubborn_Self 44 0.49 0.23 0.77 1.3
## risky_Self 45 0.46 0.24 0.76 1.2
## fake_Self 46 -0.41 0.45 0.51 0.49 2.3
##
## PA3 PA1 PA2
## SS loadings 10.10 9.74 6.79
## Proportion Var 0.21 0.20 0.14
## Cumulative Var 0.21 0.41 0.55
## Proportion Explained 0.38 0.37 0.26
## Cumulative Proportion 0.38 0.74 1.00
##
## With factor correlations of
## PA3 PA1 PA2
## PA3 1.00 -0.30 -0.03
## PA1 -0.30 1.00 -0.22
## PA2 -0.03 -0.22 1.00
##
## Mean item complexity = 1.3
## Test of the hypothesis that 3 factors are sufficient.
##
## The degrees of freedom for the null model are 1128 and the objective function was 50.6 with Chi Square of 4157.36
## The degrees of freedom for the model are 987 and the objective function was 18.74
##
## The root mean square of the residuals (RMSR) is 0.05
## The df corrected root mean square of the residuals is 0.06
##
## The harmonic number of observations is 99 with the empirical chi square 637.05 with prob < 1
## The total number of observations was 100 with Likelihood Chi Square = 1502.49 with prob < 4.5e-24
##
## Tucker Lewis Index of factoring reliability = 0.799
## RMSEA index = 0.094 and the 90 % confidence intervals are 0.065 NA
## BIC = -3042.82
## Fit based upon off diagonal values = 0.98
## Measures of factor score adequacy
## PA3 PA1 PA2
## Correlation of (regression) scores with factors 0.98 0.98 0.97
## Multiple R square of scores with factors 0.97 0.96 0.95
## Minimum correlation of possible factor scores 0.94 0.92 0.90
## calm=~calm_Self+caring_Self+considerate_Self+fair_Self+friendly_Self+genuine_Self+giving_Self+helpful_Self+honest_Self+humble_Self+loyal_Self+motivated_Self+nice_Self+respectful_Self+sympathetic_Self+trustworthy_Self+welcoming_Self
## agressive=~agressive_Self+angry_Self+bossy_Self+controlling_Self+fake_Self+grumpy_Self+jealous_Self+mean_Self+risky_Self+rude_Self+selfish_Self+snobby_Self+stubborn_Self
## attractive=~attractive_Self+awkward_Self+boring_Self+confident_Self+cool_Self+depressed_Self+flirty_Self+insecure_Self+lonely_Self+loner_Self+outgoing_Self+plain_Self+popular_Self+pushover_Self+shy_Self+social_Self+trendy_Self+ugly_Self
## lavaan 0.6-3 ended normally after 54 iterations
##
## Optimization method NLMINB
## Number of free parameters 99
##
## Used Total
## Number of observations 95 100
##
## Estimator ML
## Model Fit Test Statistic 2332.515
## Degrees of freedom 1077
## P-value (Chi-square) 0.000
##
## Parameter Estimates:
##
## Information Expected
## Information saturated (h1) model Structured
## Standard Errors Standard
##
## Latent Variables:
## Estimate Std.Err z-value P(>|z|)
## calm =~
## calm_Self 1.000
## caring_Self 1.169 0.178 6.548 0.000
## considerat_Slf 1.153 0.174 6.631 0.000
## fair_Self 1.232 0.212 5.823 0.000
## friendly_Self 1.301 0.205 6.343 0.000
## genuine_Self 1.162 0.187 6.221 0.000
## giving_Self 1.302 0.209 6.217 0.000
## helpful_Self 1.193 0.180 6.621 0.000
## honest_Self 1.038 0.195 5.329 0.000
## humble_Self 0.888 0.193 4.594 0.000
## loyal_Self 1.125 0.197 5.704 0.000
## motivated_Self 0.855 0.199 4.301 0.000
## nice_Self 1.171 0.170 6.908 0.000
## respectful_Slf 0.876 0.172 5.078 0.000
## sympathetc_Slf 1.372 0.221 6.223 0.000
## trustwrthy_Slf 1.152 0.181 6.379 0.000
## welcoming_Self 1.362 0.209 6.530 0.000
## agressive =~
## agressive_Self 1.000
## angry_Self 1.032 0.141 7.302 0.000
## bossy_Self 1.024 0.145 7.041 0.000
## controllng_Slf 0.957 0.147 6.515 0.000
## fake_Self 0.721 0.115 6.247 0.000
## grumpy_Self 1.026 0.149 6.869 0.000
## jealous_Self 0.753 0.141 5.322 0.000
## mean_Self 1.090 0.127 8.554 0.000
## risky_Self 0.549 0.143 3.841 0.000
## rude_Self 1.006 0.122 8.235 0.000
## selfish_Self 0.961 0.135 7.114 0.000
## snobby_Self 1.187 0.142 8.329 0.000
## stubborn_Self 0.559 0.160 3.497 0.000
## attractive =~
## attractive_Slf 1.000
## awkward_Self -1.206 0.174 -6.948 0.000
## boring_Self -0.943 0.155 -6.071 0.000
## confident_Self 1.377 0.160 8.618 0.000
## cool_Self 1.105 0.155 7.116 0.000
## depressed_Self -1.308 0.172 -7.582 0.000
## flirty_Self 1.147 0.168 6.831 0.000
## insecure_Self -1.460 0.179 -8.153 0.000
## lonely_Self -1.302 0.170 -7.644 0.000
## loner_Self -1.435 0.175 -8.213 0.000
## outgoing_Self 1.302 0.181 7.181 0.000
## plain_Self -1.049 0.164 -6.406 0.000
## popular_Self 1.344 0.162 8.284 0.000
## pushover_Self -0.872 0.170 -5.121 0.000
## shy_Self -1.095 0.178 -6.135 0.000
## social_Self 1.346 0.163 8.245 0.000
## trendy_Self 1.277 0.159 8.047 0.000
## ugly_Self -0.918 0.150 -6.127 0.000
##
## Covariances:
## Estimate Std.Err z-value P(>|z|)
## calm ~~
## agressive -0.398 0.111 -3.602 0.000
## attractive 0.270 0.092 2.948 0.003
## agressive ~~
## attractive -0.061 0.111 -0.549 0.583
##
## Variances:
## Estimate Std.Err z-value P(>|z|)
## .calm_Self 0.808 0.121 6.695 0.000
## .caring_Self 0.384 0.061 6.324 0.000
## .considerat_Slf 0.338 0.054 6.263 0.000
## .fair_Self 0.866 0.131 6.613 0.000
## .friendly_Self 0.598 0.093 6.440 0.000
## .genuine_Self 0.540 0.083 6.493 0.000
## .giving_Self 0.680 0.105 6.494 0.000
## .helpful_Self 0.367 0.058 6.271 0.000
## .honest_Self 0.904 0.135 6.702 0.000
## .humble_Self 1.113 0.164 6.779 0.000
## .loyal_Self 0.797 0.120 6.639 0.000
## .motivated_Self 1.261 0.185 6.800 0.000
## .nice_Self 0.233 0.039 5.951 0.000
## .respectful_Slf 0.772 0.115 6.734 0.000
## .sympathetc_Slf 0.751 0.116 6.492 0.000
## .trustwrthy_Slf 0.452 0.070 6.423 0.000
## .welcoming_Self 0.533 0.084 6.337 0.000
## .agressive_Self 0.908 0.143 6.369 0.000
## .angry_Self 0.929 0.146 6.347 0.000
## .bossy_Self 1.058 0.165 6.421 0.000
## .controllng_Slf 1.221 0.187 6.536 0.000
## .fake_Self 0.798 0.121 6.583 0.000
## .grumpy_Self 1.165 0.180 6.463 0.000
## .jealous_Self 1.396 0.208 6.700 0.000
## .mean_Self 0.453 0.080 5.639 0.000
## .risky_Self 1.681 0.247 6.807 0.000
## .rude_Self 0.492 0.083 5.910 0.000
## .selfish_Self 0.895 0.140 6.402 0.000
## .snobby_Self 0.639 0.109 5.841 0.000
## .stubborn_Self 2.165 0.317 6.824 0.000
## .attractive_Slf 0.834 0.127 6.560 0.000
## .awkward_Self 1.443 0.218 6.613 0.000
## .boring_Self 1.389 0.207 6.715 0.000
## .confident_Self 0.664 0.109 6.100 0.000
## .cool_Self 1.106 0.168 6.587 0.000
## .depressed_Self 1.194 0.184 6.496 0.000
## .flirty_Self 1.388 0.209 6.630 0.000
## .insecure_Self 1.045 0.165 6.327 0.000
## .lonely_Self 1.141 0.176 6.481 0.000
## .loner_Self 0.969 0.154 6.304 0.000
## .outgoing_Self 1.483 0.225 6.576 0.000
## .plain_Self 1.447 0.217 6.682 0.000
## .popular_Self 0.810 0.129 6.274 0.000
## .pushover_Self 1.924 0.284 6.783 0.000
## .shy_Self 1.811 0.270 6.709 0.000
## .social_Self 0.834 0.133 6.291 0.000
## .trendy_Self 0.856 0.135 6.365 0.000
## .ugly_Self 1.277 0.190 6.710 0.000
## calm 0.516 0.155 3.332 0.001
## agressive 1.075 0.262 4.110 0.000
## attractive 0.970 0.235 4.122 0.000
Are there any set 1 items that are not in the final set?
## items used_items fresh_items set1 set2
## 1 lazy FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE
## 2 rule-follower FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE
## 3 smart FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE
## 4 studious FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE
A lot of items we used were not in set 1:
## items used_items fresh_items set1 set2
## 1 kind TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
## 2 trendy TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
## 3 popular TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE
## 4 social TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE
## 5 flirty TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE
## 6 outgoing TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE
## 7 attractive TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE
## 8 cool TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE
## 9 mean TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
## 10 angry TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
## 11 grumpy TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE
## 12 jealous TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE
## 13 fake TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
## 14 assertive TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
Are there any set 2 items that are not in the final set?
## items used_items fresh_items set1 set2
## 1 lazy FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE
## 2 rule-follower FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE
## 3 studious FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE
## 4 admired FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
## 5 adventurous FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
## 6 comforting FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
## 7 daring FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
## 8 dependent FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
## 9 funny FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
## 10 leader FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
## 11 patient FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
## 12 poor FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE
A lot of items we used were not in set 2:
## items used_items fresh_items set1 set2
## 1 nice TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 2 loyal TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 3 friendly TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 4 sympathetic TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 5 giving TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 6 trustworthy TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 7 welcoming TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 8 fair TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 9 respectful TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 10 honest TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 11 motivated TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 12 kind TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
## 13 trendy TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
## 14 ugly TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 15 snobby TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 16 mean TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
## 17 rude TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 18 angry TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
## 19 aggressive TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 20 selfish TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## 21 fake TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
## 22 assertive TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
Are there any fresh set items that are not in the final set?
## [1] items used_items fresh_items set1 set2
## <0 rows> (or 0-length row.names)
There are very few items we used that are not in the fresh set:
## items used_items fresh_items set1 set2
## 1 kind TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
## 2 assertive TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
Which items in the final set were used not analyzed here?
## items used_items fresh_items set1 set2
## 1 kind TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
## 2 assertive TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE